Tuesday, June 5, 2007

Taken Seriously?

At a recent post an anonymous commenter says:

I'd take this post more seriously if it wasn't from someone who is apparently protecting the crown of a non-existent country.
I'd take this commenter seriously if:

  1. He'd have the guts to post with a name.

  2. He'd bother to go beyond what's "apparent."

  3. He'd present some substantial arguments.

Don't you just love those anonymous commenters? Don't you just love their courage? The all time high comes when they try to cast doubt on the seriousness of other people.

This blog has as its icon the late Lt.-Col. Strutt of the Royal Scots. Anyone bothering to read the blog intro – accesible just below the blog title and description – would find that out. Of course, not everyone can be expected to use their time reading it. However, when one makes claims about the blog or its author, I don't find it unreasonable to expect that kind of courtesy.

The text below the photo is a caption text. If a photo is of a person, it is quite normal that the text refers to that person. The text above the photo identifies the name of the person. The 'About Me' box identifies the author of this blog. Anyone taking his time to make comments about this blog or its author should have ample time to comprehend the difference between Lt.-Col. Strutt and the author of this blog.

Moreover, the mission of this blog is clearly stated in the description below the title of the blog. One might be tempted to ask what is apparent about a commenter who chooses to emphasize a caption text of a photo, which it should be clear is not the author of this blog, over the blog's description just below the blog's title.

Now, the commenter might perhaps be forgiven for his perception of the "apparent" were it not for the fact that the Lt.-Col. – as the caption text states – was a protector of the Austro-Hungarian Imperial-Royal Family, and not a protector of the Austro-Hungarian Crown. The Lt.-Col. was a protector of this family at a time when Austria-Hungary very much was dissolved. The Austro-Hungarian Royal Family actually still exists, although it normally these days goes by the name of the Habsburg Family – or the House of Habsburg.

One might say that the difference between the Royal Family and the Crown is insignificant, but it is not. If one is not referring to the physical object to place on a royal's head, or currency, the difference between protecting the Royal Family and the institution of the Crown when it comes to Austria-Hungary was quite significant indeed in 1919 – especially when it comes to a Lt.-Col. sent on a mission at the initiative of His Britannic Majesty George V.

Basing a one sentence comment on what is "apparent," but cannot be apparent to everyone, there is in addition no substantial argument.

My readers are of course free not to take me or my blog seriously. A similar freedom belongs to me. I will take no commenter seriously who posts anonymously, bases his comment on what first comes into mind as "apparent," and has no substantial argument.


Aquilifer said...

Is there much info available on this Lt.-Col. Lyle-Strutt? Seems interesting, but I've never heard of him or his title anywhere else.

J.K. Baltzersen said...


Thank you for your interest.

The Royal Geographical Society has a very short bio on him.

He's listed as High Commissioner of Freistadt Danzig at Wikipedia.

There really isn't much online info on him.

The offline sources I've used are two biographies by Gordon Brook-Shepherd; The Last Habsburg and Uncrowned Emperor.